example because it is so well- established on the link between thinning the ponderosa pine forest and reducing the risk of fires and reducing the risk of mountain pine beetles. it is critical and it's also cost-effective and it helps the forest service be timely to do a nepa analysis. i believe it is a model that other forests should emulate. to changegress were the way forest service fire ,uppression costs are funded what would be the best strategy and how important is ensuring adequate funding for proactive forest management in fitting into a strategy? it is critical. sense to justke fix the funding peace without

a packageincorporate of proactive forest management steps so that we have a chance to get ahead of the fire problems that we have. it's like preventive medicine. it is cost-effective and it's good for the patient. where her today from several witnesses and mr. hubbard talked about the proven cost- effectiveness of preventive measures. that absolutely needs to be part of it. there is just not enough money to pay for proactive forest management without doing some reform of the underlying laws. i've got some references in my testimony about changes to the and endangered species act and litigation that would be helpful components. what would you all think of the concept of using funds that are targeted for future forest

service acquisitions, that that be redirected to forest operations and maintenance on existing forest service lands before we buy more land? we've got these budget constraints we are dealing with. obvious thatt's the priority for the forest service needs to be taking care of the lands they own and acquiring additional lands would be a lower priority, at least for some period into the future. i would hate to see a blanket kind of up rush to something like that. there are a number of incredibly important acquisition projects that can occur that can have management inefficiency as well as protection quality. i would ask people to look at that carefully rather than to make a blanket kind of decision

like that. when you think of the source of the land acquisition funding being from our offshore oil, a one-time agreement with the public, that as we use that one- time resource we reinvest in something that has permanent value. there is something to be said for that. >> i certainly speak only for myself when i give this observation but i think it's important to be able to take care of what you have before you add on or when you add on community to make sure you can take care of that new acquisition. at the same time, i think one of the issues with the forest fire suppression is not treated like an emergency that is replenished. up, these emergencies come the forest service estimates their budget within their budget so they have to reduce the premedication -- free- mitigation.

i think that's a critical component to making sure that at least the funding for the mitigation stays stable even in the face of all of these keep heading and cholera has been hit time and time again by fires and floods and other issues and floods related to fires. i think that is a critical component that fire suppression has to be also looked at as an emergency so it does not do harm to what we are trying to prevent. >> we appreciate that. your area has been the frontline of that or it might time has well expired. i have probably exhausted that line of questioning. >> [inaudible] you have such interesting background with forest service and over on the house side in the appropriate committee -- for all of us that would like to spend more money on the front

and and less on the back and get away from this fire borrowing, do you have any final words of advice about how we can make that case or what we should be thinking about in terms of approach? investments work so well. commissioner clark mentioned a 5 to 1 return on the street we cannot afford not to do the upfront work and we know we will have the costs afterwards brits it seems essential that -- that's why i was so happy to see this committee get involved -- you can make these decisions. we can ramp up federal money and that will attract other money and more participation by more sectors of society that can get involved and help. >> thank you. >> i really do appreciate your leadership on this issue, mr. chairman.

this is important and an issue that is not partisan at all. it is not this administration's fault or the last administrations fault. it is the last several administrations and congresses fault. we do have to -- it should not be that ms. clark and mr. pitcher feel like the adjacent are asurrounding them hazard or something they fear instead of enjoy. in the situation where we have hundreds of thousands of logs laying around, that is a situation in the watershed that is almost like the collapse of the bridge in minneapolis. i would hope that we are cutting through the red tape and doing all we can do to go forward so that we can aggressively get the area cleaned up and restored.

thank you, mr. chairman and thanks also to the panel. you and mr. hubbard were excellent on this was a helpful here in. we appreciate you making the trip. >> i was say to the ranking member of the committee that my wife's grandfather is from and was an attorney in eastern arkansas with a law firm that is still there. one of the times i met with him, he remembered very fondly standing at the headwaters of the arkansas river with a river running between his legs. that was in the great state of colorado. that does connect us all. i want to thank my colleagues who are here today and i want to thank all the witnesses for appearing before the committee. and he additional questions for the record should be submitted to the committee clerk five business days from today. that is by 4 p.m. tuesday, november 12. we are adjourned. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] >> and a few moments "washington journal" is live.

at 10 a.m. eastern, " newsmakers." after that, last week's hearing with health and human services secretary kathleen's ability as, talking about the health care law and the latest improvements being made to the health care.gov website. the places note called the mercedes-benz superdome in new orleans where the new orleans saints play. it is built entirely at public expense. after hurricane katrina badly damaged the area and when they hosted football games again, that was a national feel-good story. the public paid for all the repairs. in public has invested today's dollars about $1 billion in the construction of the mercedes-benz superdome. the man who owns the new orleans saints keeps almost all of the revenue generated there.

why don't people rebel against this? one reason is that many in the public don't understand this is taking place. the second reason is they feel there is nothing they can do about it and it is based on insider deals and it is. the most recent time there was a vote in miami last year, there is a vote on whether to use public money to renovate the place where the miami dolphins play in the citizens of miami voted strongly against doing that. " king ofith the sports author" tonight. next, we will discuss last week's elections in new jersey and virginia for state governor. and what the results might mean for the 2014 midterm elections. that, fair vote talks about the factors relating to the gridlock on capitol hill and later, conversation about u.s. surveillance abroad and how it

is affecting international relations and diplomacy. we will talk with the council on foreign relations. "washington journal" is next. morning and welcome on the sunday, november 10. we will kick off "washington journal closed quote with a look ahead to 2016. it may be early that nonetheless the election results in virginia and new jersey -- we will look ahead at what it means for the white house. we want to hear from republicans only. if you live in eastern central part of the country, 202-585-